[HoosierDaddy]

The major sticking point I had with ascendants was: "at what point does their obvious connection to some warren begin affecting everything they do?" So... I tried to break it down into: no magical enhancement, possible time enhancement, definite time and probable magical enhancement of skill. For list purposes inclusion in a House does not constitute the third category of enhancement, which is how I drew the line on Karsa & Kallor.

[Silencer]

Are you forgetting Kallor is apparently impervious to being stabbed through the stomach and Karsa has a pocket warren, full effects unkown, though? Those alone rate as magical enhancement, to me.

But, as I said, I like that list. ^^

[HoosierDaddy]

Well, I don't think Karsa's pocket warren increases his skill with a sword. I thought it just makes him kind of immune to magic? As per Kallor... was the stomach stabbing TtH, cause I don't quite remember that part. Anyways... he is kind of the hardest to place in the ascendant-nonascendant category, and the whole curse's failing on possibly Draconus, and definitely Nightchill and K'rul impact on their curse on him to never ascend make it confusing as hell. My ascendants are gods. For list purposes no worship = no ascendency. Kallor might heal magically... but so do the Avowed in many cases. They aren't quite "ascendant". The lines are so blurred here that it is hard to draw them, but to give an adequate gauge on capabilities some lines have to be drawn despite the blurriness.

This post has been edited by HoosierDaddy: 27 December 2008 - 06:26 AM

[Silencer]

Hmm...well, Rake is not a God. He rejected his worship. Silchas has no worshippers left, I think. Icarium is unaware of his worship...etc.

And ascendants are not Gods. The two are separate.

Kallor thing was RotCG. But with that I was merely going on that you said your categories were decided by magical enhancement, in which case Kallor definitely qualifies for that. And I also said that Skinner could possibly be ascendant, as could Greymane.

That's the thing, of course. There is no straight cut-off.

Long story short, I think Kallor may need to be a category up. Karsa I can live with.

[HoosierDaddy]

Bah, I'm drunk and everything starts blending together... anyways, at this point I'm just going to say I'm sticking to the original list and feel that in general 3>2>1 in as should be expected. I could, however, argue that Rake is a god despite his wishes "Andii belief" and that Ruin is a god inline with his wishes "White Crow"... But I won't, cause it don't matter.

[Aptorian]

I don't think Kallors "damage resistance" is magical, I think it's a biological sideeffect of the chemicals and various other substances he's used to stay the ravages of aging.

[Silencer]

It is still a non-normal trait, caused by something extra. Rather than the normal operation of his body.

[muco]

Silencer, on Dec 27 2008, 06:11 AM, said:

I think it's more that Dassem had respect for Karsa. Sure, Dassem was afraid before he met him, but he was still willing to fight Karsa if he had taken Rhulad's sword!

True..Dassem would have definitly fought Karsa if he had Rhulad's sword.

And Karsa would have fought Dassem if he thought Dassem was in his way.

In TTH, their interactions were something that happens between two equals. Sure they had respect for each other and even developed friendship but it was still a friendship and respect that you see between two equals.

The point is just because Dassem was afraid of Karsa does not mean Karsa would have killed Dassem, and on the other hand Karsa being shaken by Dassem's skills does not mean he would have backed off from a fight or might not win.

[Silencer]

Hmmm...however, I would have to say that Karsa's exact words: "Only a fool would step between them (or was it "those two") now." show that he feels he would get shredded if he intervened. Admittedly, that's not the same as: "Either of those would defeat me".

I wouldn't count Karsa out in a battle against Dassem, but I would not bet on him. And I think that's how I rank these swordsmen - if you pit x against y, who would I put money on to win? Ignoring "the SE effect", i.e. the fact that the author can choose, which would I feel safest putting cash on. Meh.

[muco]

In a sword fight, Dassem would win against Karsa but I doubt any fight involving Karsa would be purely a sword fight...thats where I guess he has a chance against Dassem.

And this was not meant to be Karsa Vs Dassem because Dassem is clearly a better sword fighter. I wanted to point out Karsa is not all 'me hulk..me smash' kinda guy but does have mad sword skillz when compared to the best in malazan world.

[Silencer]

Well, yes, then I would agree. Karsa is no slouch in the swordsmanship department!

[The Tyrant Lizard]

Karsa showed how much skill he has when he fought the Seguleh. I think it was made pretty clear in the narative though, that he was no match for Dassem, and he knew it.

[Tapper]

About two swords versus one: I'm aware that there are martial arts involving two weapons (there's arnis de mano, a rattan stick MA that's lethal), but, to my knowledge, at no point in history there's a nationial tradition/ official army that trained in the use of two swords simultaneously. Rapier and main gauche come close, but they have very different lengths and weren't used at a time when people wore a lot of metal body armour as the malazans are described to wear, and the main gauche was mostly for parrying thrusts, anyway.

The Seguleh just have no real match in history, and I guess the main reason for that is that two swords really are not better than one.

As for best swordsman:

1 - 10: various ascendants & gods, including Rake, who have the fancy to wield swords and wield them more than passably well, rather then turn into a Dragon/open a warren and blast away (a.k.a. the effective solution);
11 and 12: Dassem and an enraged Icarium;
13 and on: Brys, Skinner, the Seguleh top ranks (10 and up), a few Mortal Swords, our favorite savage Karsa, Trull, Fear, Dancer, Onos Too'lan in undead form, maybe IB (but I think not);
30 or there abouts: Kallor, WJ, Brys' rival for King's Champion, Greymane, a few other Avowed, Urko: this is where you find the first few entirely mortal people who aren't blessed or ascended or once-per-century-prodigies (and that's debatable, too).

Basically, it depends on the form of the day between the various immortals and the other ranks. Osserc is probably in Rake's league, or close enough to survive every confrontation unless Rake tries awfully hard. So is Draconus, so is Kilmandaros, and maybe Silchas (though I doubt that, but that is probably my bias). Spinnock is definately below that, maybe on par with Kallor, maybe with Brys.

If you were to look at the best overall average skill per combatant, though, I'd look at the Seguleh, and I guess that is what counts. In the end, being a Champion is awfully nice, but you can't slaughter an entire army, you can't be everywhere, you will get tired, you may not get to kill the enemy commander if he is smart and stays behind his ranks, and thus it is the best army that takes the field in the end... Or the one with the most powerful mages

Lastly, I do not believe Tool has become a better fighter now that he is mortal. He could allow himself to be chopped up by enemies as long as he wasn't decapitated or had his spine, legs or arms severed, seeing how it was dead tissue anyway. He may be faster now, but he tires (and lifting a stone sword is hard work), bleeds and can't dismiss wounds anymore.

[Dancer+]

muco, on Dec 29 2008, 07:39 AM, said:

Silencer, on Dec 27 2008, 06:11 AM, said:

I think it's more that Dassem had respect for Karsa. Sure, Dassem was afraid before he met him, but he was still willing to fight Karsa if he had taken Rhulad's sword!

True..Dassem would have definitly fought Karsa if he had Rhulad's sword.

And Karsa would have fought Dassem if he thought Dassem was in his way.

In TTH, their interactions were something that happens between two equals. Sure they had respect for each other and even developed friendship but it was still a friendship and respect that you see between two equals.

The point is just because Dassem was afraid of Karsa does not mean Karsa would have killed Dassem, and on the other hand Karsa being shaken by Dassem's skills does not mean he would have backed off from a fight or might not win.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. It's still unclear of who would win between Dassem and Karsa, and this is coming from someone who is partial to Dassem, the context of the comment suggests that only somebody stupid would have come between the incredible skill and will of those two fighters at that PRESENT moment when they were so intent, singular and concentrating.

I want to make an analogy, Karsa may have been shocked at their speeds but it's only from his perspective and not someone who is objectively making an assessment of both Karsa and Dassem. For example when Bowling I saw someone else bowl and said "Wow, that guy bowls incredibly fast! *shocked look*", then I looked at his speed on the screen and it was actually quite a bit slower than mine (1-2mph, he was bowling at 10.25mph/16.5kph). I didn't realise how fast I bowled, the same could be true of Karsa; he may not know exactly how fast he fights. I'm just saying this could be a moderate factor to consider.

[Solar]

Dancer, on Dec 29 2008, 12:50 PM, said:

muco, on Dec 29 2008, 07:39 AM, said:

Silencer, on Dec 27 2008, 06:11 AM, said:

I think it's more that Dassem had respect for Karsa. Sure, Dassem was afraid before he met him, but he was still willing to fight Karsa if he had taken Rhulad's sword!

True..Dassem would have definitly fought Karsa if he had Rhulad's sword.

And Karsa would have fought Dassem if he thought Dassem was in his way.

In TTH, their interactions were something that happens between two equals. Sure they had respect for each other and even developed friendship but it was still a friendship and respect that you see between two equals.

The point is just because Dassem was afraid of Karsa does not mean Karsa would have killed Dassem, and on the other hand Karsa being shaken by Dassem's skills does not mean he would have backed off from a fight or might not win.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. It's still unclear of who would win between Dassem and Karsa, and this is coming from someone who is partial to Dassem, the context of the comment suggests that only somebody stupid would have come between the incredible skill and will of those two fighters at that PRESENT moment when they were so intent, singular and concentrating.

I want to make an analogy, Karsa may have been shocked at their speeds but it's only from his perspective and not someone who is objectively making an assessment of both Karsa and Dassem. For example when Bowling I saw someone else bowl and said "Wow, that guy bowls incredibly fast! *shocked look*", then I looked at his speed on the screen and it was actually quite a bit slower than mine (1-2mph, he was bowling at 10.25mph/16.5kph). I didn't realise how fast I bowled, the same could be true of Karsa; he may not know exactly how fast he fights. I'm just saying this could be a moderate factor to consider.

Quote

To all who witnessed - the cultists, Samar Dev, Karsa Orlong, even unto the five Hounds of Shadow and the Great Ravens hunched on every ledge - that first clash of weapons was too fast to register. Sparks slanted, the night air rang with savage parries, counter-blows, the biting crunch of edges against cross hilts. Even their bodies were but a blur.

That one part of the Dassem vs Rake fight puts them both above Karsa significantly. It also puts them above Icarium - at least Karsa could see his movements.

[Dancer+]

When could Karsa see Icarium's movements? When Icarium was sober a.k.a. non raged like I think because if so that doesn't count.

There are a number of problems with what you've posted, it likely means that they are significantly above Karsa but then you have the matter of perspective, instinct and interractivity so it's only circumstantial evidence. But like pretty much everyone has agreed so far Rake and Dassem are likely the two best swordsmen that we've seen in action so far (perhaps bar Icarium). In Bonehunters Icarium manages to slice and dice a T'lan Imass to pieces before they hit the ground, we've not seen anything like that again.

[Onos]

Tapper, on Dec 29 2008, 06:12 AM, said:

About two swords versus one: I'm aware that there are martial arts involving two weapons (there's arnis de mano, a rattan stick MA that's lethal), but, to my knowledge, at no point in history there's a nationial tradition/ official army that trained in the use of two swords simultaneously. Rapier and main gauche come close, but they have very different lengths and weren't used at a time when people wore a lot of metal body armour as the malazans are described to wear, and the main gauche was mostly for parrying thrusts, anyway.

The Seguleh just have no real match in history, and I guess the main reason for that is that two swords really are not better than one.

The reason is an army of only double swordsman would be shredded by archers and projectiles. Seguleh make excellent small scale melee or duel fighters. But seguleh equivalent people living on earth would not develop as there was never a war style that favoured them (assuming they all fight 2 swords), thus the best and the brightest would never practice with them. (example: I am sure there is 1 skating rink in cuba, but if you are an athlete there you are more likely to be pushed into baseball or boxing etc. as opposed to being a hockey player) As far as i know most/all historical melee armies were heavily shield based.

[Onos]

RE: Karsa's Pocket Warren.

I have always viewed time as being different (slowed?) inside warrens. There have been many documented comments on this. So, my conclusion is that time around Karsa can be warped (slowed) to suit his pusposes. As a result he moves faster when fighting.

I admit i cant prove this 100%, nor do i know the extent of its powers. Just the malazan world is fairly magical, so usually when something is mentioned, it is relevant and usually has some benefit. This might be a question to ask SE.

[Tapper]

Onos, on Dec 29 2008, 08:10 PM, said:

Tapper, on Dec 29 2008, 06:12 AM, said:

About two swords versus one: I'm aware that there are martial arts involving two weapons (there's arnis de mano, a rattan stick MA that's lethal), but, to my knowledge, at no point in history there's a nationial tradition/ official army that trained in the use of two swords simultaneously. Rapier and main gauche come close, but they have very different lengths and weren't used at a time when people wore a lot of metal body armour as the malazans are described to wear, and the main gauche was mostly for parrying thrusts, anyway.

The Seguleh just have no real match in history, and I guess the main reason for that is that two swords really are not better than one.

The reason is an army of only double swordsman would be shredded by archers and projectiles. Seguleh make excellent small scale melee or duel fighters. But seguleh equivalent people living on earth would not develop as there was never a war style that favoured them (assuming they all fight 2 swords), thus the best and the brightest would never practice with them. (example: I am sure there is 1 skating rink in cuba, but if you are an athlete there you are more likely to be pushed into baseball or boxing etc. as opposed to being a hockey player) As far as i know most/all historical melee armies were heavily shield based.

Not entirely. Japanese medieval combat is very much shieldless (at the least, I haven't seen any picture of it in art), despite featuring a lot of expert archers. Same for the Tercio & Swiss pike regiments that dominated the battlefields of Italy and France for a time when the gun wasn't yet fully dominant.

Unarmoured or light armoured soldiers did fine in melee even during the Napoleontic times, when shooting routines weren't as dominant as one would think they were and a lot of fighting was done with the bayonet. True, casualties were staggering at times, but I think they were still lower than what SE regularly throws at us

I think the issue is not just projectile weaponry, but also weight of the weapons needed to pierce or smash metal armour and how fast one would tire waving such weapons around, and how much of a frontage one would need to wield such weapons... I'm sure you would require so much space that they enemy can put three men in front of you, hiding behind their shields, waiting for a chance to strike.
Not only that, but I bet it is quite difficult to wield two weapons at the same time, remain balanced, and do something useful with both without becoming utterly predictable. Fortunately, fantasy doesn't do a lot of these restrictions, and SE is quite good at keeping things more or less believeable.

[The Tyrant Lizard]

Also fighting in formation with two weapons is far more risky to yourown side than fighting with sword and shield. I think it a general rule that unless the weapon requires two hands (battle axe or pike or something similar) the free hand should always be used or it's just wasted. Dirks were often used in close combat to finish an opponents whose sword had become trapped. And didn't the spartans use the shields themselves as weapons? If not, they should have. Sort of like a big round knuckle duster.

I wouldnt have thought two swords of the same length would be practical. The samurai had one long and one shorter, probably one for the primary hand being the long sword. Boxers favour a hand, and fight "sided", so maybe ancient warriors did too.